holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating post-judgment interest from the judgment date rather than the date of the jury’s verdict six weeks earlier.
How later courts described this case
- holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in calculating post-judgment interest from the judgment date rather than the date of the jury’s verdict six weeks earlier.
- finding that there was ample evidence to support the conclusion that an oiler was a seaman
- holding that the employer need not be the owner or operator of the vessel
- a six-week delay between verdict and judgment was not unreasonable and did not warrant a departure from the language of Sec. 1961, which provides that "interest shall be calculated from the date of the entry of the judgment"
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM:
The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en bane, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.